Re: Garbage collection in C++
On Nov 19, 1:00 am, "Chris M. Thomasson" <n...@spam.invalid> wrote:
"James Kanze" <james.ka...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b4c335d6-2e3d-412b-91f3-e79e25ca742c@v16g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 18, 8:23 pm, "Chris M. Thomasson" <n...@spam.invalid>
wrote:
"Stefan Ram" <r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote in message
news:C++-20081118125720@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de...
[...]>http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html
=BB[A]llocation in modern JVMs is far faster than the best
performing malloc implementations.
[...]
This is hardcore MAJOR BULLSHI%! Who ever wrote that crap is
__TOTALLY__ ignorant; WOW!
More likely, he's done some actual measurements, rather than
just basing his opinion on prejudices. That corresponds
more or less with the actual measurements I've made at
different times. For programs with a lot of allocation of
short lived objects, garbage collection beats malloc/free
hands-down, performance wise.
Your acting as if GC totally devastates malloc/free; this is
simply not true.
No. I'm simply reporting actual measurments.
BTW, what makes you think I would actually allocate/deallocate
single objects with malloc/free?
And how is that relevant? Of course, you can optimize your code
in such a way as to work around the problem. The same thing
holds for garbage collection, of course, if you find yourself in
a configuration where it doesn't perform adequately. But that's
not really the point.
--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:james.kanze@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orient=E9e objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place S=E9mard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'=C9cole, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34